ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation at different targets on brain function in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative efficacy and mechanistic insights of non-invasive neuromodulation and motor rehabilitation on functional reorganization of the supplementary motor area in subacute stroke: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation modulating supplementary motor area in stroke rehabilitation: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.AIMS neuroscience · 2026Review
- The architecture of quality of life after stroke: a network comparison of mild-to-moderate versus severe functional impairment.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on spontaneous neural activity in post-stroke aphasia: a protocol for a coordinate-based meta-analysis of fALFF studies.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can improve post stroke motor function. However, there is little research on targets. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of rTMS therapy with different targets on post stroke motor function and neural plasticity. Methods: Fifty-four subjects were randomly divided into M1 (Primary motor area) group, SMA (supplementary motor area) group and Sham group, and were given 10 Hz on the affected M1 area, SMA area and sham stimulation rTMS. The primary outcomes included Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity Scale (FMA-UE), Fugl-Meyer Assessment Lower Extremity Scale (FMA-LE) and Berg balance scale (BBS). Secondary outcomes: amplitude of low frequency fluctuation (ALFF), regional homogeneity (ReHo) and functional connectivity (FC) were analyzed by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to evaluate brain functional activation and functional connectivity changes. Results: The 2-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a significant group × time interaction ( Discussion: In conclusion, SMA-rTMS intervention has a better recovery effect on motor dysfunction after stroke than Sham-rTMS. SMA-rTMS led to similar improvement on motor function but significantly greater improvement on balance compared to M1-rTMS, and this may pave a new way for stroke rehabilitation. Clinical trial registration: Registration number: ChiCTR2200060955, https://www.chictr.org.cn/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.